Hello ,
I would like to ask the girls that started transitioning having a musuclar body if they can share some methods and outcomes in delaing with it .
I was not really musuclar ( for a male ) , yet for a girl i was and still am quite musuclar . I know some girls are into bodybuilding but i really am not and i would like to get rid of them .
The areas with the biggest problems are the forearms , arms and shoulders , the rest is quite ok .
I am using HRT for a while now yet they seem to stick with me and i would like to hear how others deal with it .
One of the things i am not yet willing to do is a really restrictive or weird diet . I am into eating healthy , and living healthy overall . That doesn't help with losing muscle but it has so many advantages that i won't give it up .
I heard some use surgeries for muscles like forearms but i wouldn't have the money .
Also some said that using casts for a while would allow the muscle to atrophy enough .
I only do some long walks and some exercises for my thighs and buttocks , so the muscles are pretty much relaxing most of the time .
Any idea will be appreciated
Thanks
You could try to appreciate your body for what it is. I am a very fit trans woman, and men are more attracted to me for it, and my cisgender girlfriends are jealous of my build.
Its not so bad. Look up Rosie the riveter she was a muscular badass lady. :)
Currently, I have been described as "athletic looking woman". Having been on HRT for almost 2 years and 3 months, the changes are constant, yet subtle. My arms are finally thinning down, not so much maybe trapezius and upper back muscles - their current state cannot be compared as to what was before, but I flex them, the body outline becomes not very feminine. My neck has slimmed down significantly and so have my shoulders. I used to have very strong legs and they are still strong, but in a different way.
You said that You are not a fan of dieting and other stuff - well, they say that the good result is 80% diet and 20% exercise and that You cannot outrun a bad diet. My personal experience confirms it - I used to jog a lot, yet I was keeping the same weight, mostly due to consupmtion of complex carbohydrates - my kept burning what I had just consumed, I was not adding any more weight, yet I could not see any results. Another point to consider - one can eat extremely healthy but even healthy food contains calories :).
So in the end it is all about looking at calories, trying to avoid complex carbohydrates and regular exercise (sounds simple, but try to stick to that routine :) ).
On the other hand, I would have been in a position to pick and choose, I would have preferred to have 5 feet 4 inch tall, slim and fragile body. But... life is life and we have to live with what we have, and being 5 feet 9 inches, with very fit build and shoulders slightly above the average female range adds some sense of private security - like I probably would not the most obvious choice for a crime victim :D.
Thank you Oriah ,
I said i know some girls like it and also i know , the guys like it , but they like me being pre -op too , so screw them . I have my idea of what i want to look like and also the bodybuilding was all for a cause , for the old role . Especially that i thought i like girls and the muscles would've help .
Try eating less protein and doing cardio on an empty stomach (like early morning before you've eaten). Your body still burns fat tissue but will also burn some muscle tissue in a healthy way. Without a lot of protein behind it, the muscle won't regenerate as much.
Wow I really thought I'd never use that Exercise Science course from freshman class of college. Haha.
Thank you Katelyn ,
I know this is an option , but from what i read the muscle once there would remain very little affected by the low protein intake . I don't have a link now , but there were some studies . Beside i am scared that i will lose my hair , as it requires extra proteins , and also many hormones and neurotransmitters require quality complete proteins . I just recovered from a severe depression and i know nutrition is one thing you don't want to mess with . Happiness is only as much as our inner chemicals allow to be , it is all inside us . Being less depressed i can deal with it in a healthy way , like a big girl , when i was depressed i was just crying and not doing anything real . Btw , when i used to work out it was that thing that stress destroy muscle mass - pfff , not for me :(
I get it. I wasn't suggesting going with no protein either. For me, still living as a man, I cut my protein from 30% of my caloric intake to 15%. 20% is the recommendation so it's not like I'm doing anything drastic. I just replaced red meat and cheese with beans and high protein vegetables. It's producing a more slender figure, which is what I'm going for.
I follow the guidelines of WAPF , i eat little to no beans and also little veggies . I eat meat , some raw dairy and eggs , healthy fats , some safe carbs (rice) , and some fruits and veggies from time to time . I don't think at proteins in a percentage , but i try to eat about 80 grams or more a day being at about 64 kg now . Again , i don't see them really mattering . I was anorexic in my teens , i know what not eating means but i don't want to go back on that route . I am hoping more on hormones , lack of exercise and maybe some methods like isolating them in casts for a few weeks .
I cannot image how being at 64kg can make someone still looking over-muscular...
I look like in that avatar although it is an year old , my body is similar . I am not huge huge but my arms and shoulders are really unpleasant . I have no fat and my legs are ok-ish , maybe i could even get fatter there .
It is the fact that there is muscle , not the size itself , it's the shape and texture .
Hi,
Many of us share or have shared your struggle. My only recommendation to think about is one I'm sure you've already considered: gaining weight. You mention your weight, but not your height. The important thing you say is that you don't have fat. I have gained about five pounds in the last years. At 5'8", I don't really show the gain and my clothes all still fit, but I look a lot less muscular. Body fat cloaks muscles on women exactly the way it does on men. Note: it also may help that I added a third year on hrt during that time.
Good luck. And your avatar looks quite lovely.
Thank you :)
I am 5' 11" , a little large framed , with thick bones . I would gain weight - and love it , i mean i loooove to eat - but i am scared not to ' fill ' up the muscles too . My hope was that the transition fairy would come and make me skinny and then i would round up from scratch .
141 is exactly what I weighed before I gained 5 pounds. And at 146 people still think I'm very thin. I'm assuming your hormone levels are all where they should be. If so, gaining may really be a friend to you. Best wishes on this!
Thank you
Have a great day :*
Well imo a bit of change in nutrition might help...
a doctor recommended avocado oil for a more female pattern because of a mixture of oils and further ingredients...
you might reduce raw meat...
maybe keeping chicken...
butter might be an idea, instead of artificial fats...
it might also give a more female pattern...
and try vegetables and fruit, in a healthy variety...
beans and lentils are an excellent source of protein...
imo the body processes protein differently if its from plant or animal sources.
So more plant protein might help.
You might also look here:
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,167887.msg1661891.html#msg1661891
Well over time excessive muscles should build down... and a bit more female distribution of fat should show...
hugs
Quote from: ♡ Emily ♡ on August 07, 2015, 05:38:38 AM
I cannot image how being at 64kg can make someone still looking over-muscular...
I'm 178cm and 67kg (down from 75kg). But despite my weight loss (predominantly muscle, as I didn't have much else to lose) and having been on antiandrogens for 3-months, I look as athletic/muscular as ever. There's a difference to being muscular with a bit of 'padding' and being toned. If you're very toned, you will look more muscular than someone who perhaps has more actual muscle. As a trans person, it's a conundrum, despite the fact my whole career has been physique focussed.
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 07, 2015, 06:00:06 AM
Thank you :)
I am 5' 11" , a little large framed , with thick bones . I would gain weight - and love it , i mean i loooove to eat - but i am scared not to ' fill ' up the muscles too . My hope was that the transition fairy would come and make me skinny and then i would round up from scratch .
That's the problem with gaining weight; you gain it all over, so all of your problem areas will standout more. I've discovered through trial and error that it's better for me to be thin and less curvy with my body type.
I used to play sports all the time, and I was incredibly fit back when I was younger. I lossed 30 pounds from 18 to 20 and still at 23 I was far to fit to have a stereotypical cis women's musculature. Since I started hrt 8 month's ago I haven't rounded down at all in my arms and shoulders since then but my stomach has definitely changed. I'm hoping to gaining some weight to see if the fat will come in in more feminine Areas. I'll let u know who that goes.
I was a former male bodybuilder - 5'6", 175 lbs, between 4 - 6.25% bodyfat in season, so a decently stacked frame. Stopped lifting seriously ~ 8yrs ago, went on total lifting hiatus from about 5 yrs ago to just recently (joined a gym ~ 1 month ago). In the interim took up competitive road cycling averaging ~ 120 training miles/week and stopped any form of weight training and dropped protein intake from 1 gm/pound bodyweight to may 1 gm/3 pounds bodyweight (trying to shed upper body mass for cycling). With all this, I was able to drop my bodyweight to 155 lbs - even though I shed quite abit of upper body mass, I was still abit more muscular then quite a few of the other male road cyclists (and definitely most of the female cylists).
I started HRT about 2 years ago at 155 lbs and my weight has consistently hovered between 147 - 153 lbs. Even though I've clearly shed muscle (and gained a little bit of "hormone fat"), I'm still rather muscular overall - I still have a broad shouldered back, deltoids are still round, clear bicep bump, can still delineate the triceps heads.
On paper, I've clearly lost body mass - the tape measure and the weight scale tell me so; however, the reality is I'm still in the muscular/athletic male physique category. I would love to have an athletic female physique - but not sure if that will happen (due to the intrinsic differences in the post-pubertal musculo-skeletal system between males/females).
I can say I have gained alittle fat on my bottom - it actually jiggles abit, which it never ever ever did; I've also gained alittle breast tissue (again, jiggles), so my body is feminizing, though I still have the problem areas.
Quote from: summer710 on August 07, 2015, 07:20:58 PM
intrinsic differences in the post-pubertal musculo-skeletal system between males/females...
Yep, the chassis somewhat dictates body shape. Though how young you transition has an impact.
I get you. Had the same concern about muscle mass/built when started transition.
I wasn't into bodybuilding, yet I practiced martial arts (bullying) for some years.
I'm 5'6'' (168cm) and through a very restrictive diet (almost no proteins, less tan 1000 calories a day) I reached 114lbs (52kg). Most of the muscle went away, even the damn pronounced shoulders. At this point everybody told me (even guys) I was too skinny and I should gain weight. Well, I decided to start exercising (lower body only) again and eating properly (120 gr protein a day at least, rice, veggies, fruits, chicken). Despite I didn't exercised the arms/upper body (I just did some pilates, lots of running and lots of road cycling) I re-filled my shoulders and reached 128 lbs (58kg), mostly muscle everywhere.
As far as my experience goes, a very restrictive / very hypocaloric diet works but jeopardizes a healthy nutrition. Personally I don't mind to look a bit athletic, I prefer to keep on eating right and being fit and active.
Funny thing my brother, my mother and me have the most athletic builds in the family. Damn, If I was so ectomorph just like as my father...
I'm 5ft 11 and weigh 80kg which is actually the same weight I was when I was 19. I used to be a heavy truck mechanic and was strong and muscular in my arms and shoulders. After 24 years of HRT my upper body strength is only around half what it was and I've lost most of that muscle mass. My hips and bum have rounded out and I just make it into having B cup breasts. So even at age 61 I still look like I'm fit and in good shape for my age.
I must tell you a funny story. After four years on HRT I was back living with my Mum and one day Mum asked me to take her car into the township and pick up a bag of coal for her. I went to the firewood and fuel dealers and a big husky guy put the 40kg bag of coal into the boot of Mum's car for me. Once I was back home I grabbed hold of that bag of coal without really thinking about it and all I managed to do was pull myself into the boot of the car. Talk about laugh, - I leaned back against Mum's car and laughed until my sides were sore. Before HRT I could have lifted that bag of coat without any trouble at all, but after four years of hormones I couldn't even begin to shift it.
HRT was the best thing that could have happened to me because my upper body strength in my truck mechanic days was getting to the point where I was distorting my skeletal structure and having all kinds of problems with joint and nerve pain. After four years on HRT all those problems had completely vanished as my musculature now matched my skeleton which was a blessed relief.
I've just recently started to fully embrace my intersex self and I'm no longer trying to force myself into 'passing' as a woman so being androgynous doesn't worry me at all. Because of that my experience might be different to yours.
Edit: Others have mentioned diet so I'll put my hand up for being a vegetarian.
Quote from: kittenpower on August 07, 2015, 02:23:21 PM
That's the problem with gaining weight; you gain it all over, so all of your problem areas will standout more. I've discovered through trial and error that it's better for me to be thin and less curvy with my body type.
I used to hope otherwise , now that the hormones and activity have changed . Maybe just get some fat deposits not muscle growth from the extra weight gained . Also because of the HRT the fat would go to breasts ass thighs ...
But these are dreams , i have the weirdest body , it didn't respond well to androgens , yet some features changed in a masculine way . Now it doesn't seem to respond to estrogen either
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 08, 2015, 03:17:38 AM
I used to hope otherwise , now that the hormones and activity have changed . Maybe just get some fat deposits not muscle growth from the extra weight gained . Also because of the HRT the fat would go to breasts ass thighs ...
But these are dreams , i have the weirdest body , it didn't respond well to androgens , yet some features changed in a masculine way . Now it doesn't seem to respond to estrogen either
You could try some changes in diet...
different fats... I watched a video of a doc explaining, he said to try avocado oil...
avoiding carbonated drinks, and too much carbs...
and as others have experienced, a more vegetarian diet might help.
Thats me in my avatar 3 months ago.I'm 6 foot tall and anything from 73 to 75 kilos depending on fluid intake etc.I only really do lower body exercise but thats just because thats what I enjoy and fitness is a happy side effect of having fun.I'm in the same weight range now as I was before transition but after both FFS and SRS I went down to 69kg.In each case it took over a year for the weight to come back. To be honest I havent had to deal with having big muscles-my build being tall and slim and sort of built for cycling,running long distance.But saying that I dont really like the width of my shoulders or my foot size.I guess we all have bits of us that bother us a bit.
Quote from: Laura_7 on August 08, 2015, 04:32:49 AM
You could try some changes in diet...
different fats... I watched a video of a doc explaining, he said to try avocado oil...
avoiding carbonated drinks, and too much carbs...
and as others have experienced, a more vegetarian diet might help.
Thank you for the reply ,
I am eating in a close to paleo / wapf style , so i eat a lot of fats , mostly saturated ( which even the ' scientists ' agreed now that are the healthy one ): butter , lard , coconut oil , ... Also i eat sardnies and pastured eggs for enough omega 3 .
I don't eat any food with ingredients , so to speak . One could say i eat packaged foods but they are the unprocessed , single ingredient foods , every thing must be contained in a package . Other than that i don't eat or drink junk food , so no carbonated drinks or processed carbs .
And my opinion is that vegetarian / vegan is unhealthy so i am not going there anytime soon .
I guess the only option nutrition wise is a crash diet , eating close to nothing , like in my teens and like Wednesday said . But i am scared i will only lose more , i mean even my hair , it is already falling due to stress and a surgery i had . If i lose it all i will need 3-4 years or more to regrow it and in this time i could lose the muscle slowly .
Not to mention the thyroid problems i could get and many others .
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 08, 2015, 04:42:28 AM
I guess the only option nutrition wise is a crash diet , eating close to nothing , like in my teens and like Wednesday said . But i am scared i will only lose more , i mean even my hair , it is already falling due to stress and a surgery i had . If i lose it all i will need 3-4 years or more to regrow it and in this time i could lose the muscle slowly .
Not to mention the thyroid problems i could get and many others .
There is no need to rush things. A gradual change in the right direction should help much.
And it might stick better.
QuoteAnd my opinion is that vegetarian / vegan is unhealthy
Why ? I read an analysis that people were predominantly vegetarians before an ice age. Plants were abundant, and there was no need to hunt that much.
Only after plants were less abundant people resorted to eating more meat.
Well those times are over. There is a huge variety of plants available.
The body is able to process both plant and non plant food. It even needs plant food, a purely non vegetarian diet cannot be sustained without artificial additions.
There are analyses saying that processing plant food is less straining for the body, especially compared to red meat.
And there are millions of healthy vegetarians worldwide showing that a diet can be healthy.
If you picture a vegetarian it is rarely an overweight or very muscular person. Rather a well toned person.
As others have pointed out, eating more vegetarian helped them.
You might try by cutting on red meat, switching to lean meat like poultry and cutting the overall amount gradually.
Instead maybe lentils and beans, and fresh cooked vegetables... which also taste delicios.
Some of them taste very delicious grilled or fried, like eggplant.
Some recipes are delicious and easy... selfmade flatbread with salad and tomatoes or onions...
soups with onions... etc...
hugs
Quote from: Laura_7 on August 08, 2015, 05:48:43 AM
There is no need to rush things. A gradual change in the right direction should help much.
And it might stick better.
Why ? I read an analysis that people were predominantly vegetarians before an ice age. Plants were abundant, and there was no need to hunt that much.
Only after plants were less abundant people resorted to eating more meat.
Well those times are over. There is a huge variety of plants available.
The body is able to process both plant and non plant food. It even needs plant food, a purely non vegetarian diet cannot be sustained without artificial additions.
There are analyses saying that processing plant food is less straining for the body, especially compared to red meat.
And there are millions of healthy vegetarians worldwide showing that a diet can be healthy.
If you picture a vegetarian it is rarely an overweight or very muscular person. Rather a well toned person.
As others have pointed out, eating more vegetarian helped them.
You might try by cutting on red meat, switching to lean meat like poultry and cutting the overall amount gradually.
Instead maybe lentils and beans, and fresh cooked vegetables... which also taste delicios.
Some of them taste very delicious grilled or fried, like eggplant.
Some recipes are delicious and easy... selfmade flatbread with salad and tomatoes or onions...
soups with onions... etc...
hugs
I feel overwhelmed to talk about this , it's such a huge topic and also usually people become angry and all becomes kind of a doctrinary fight , losing the only fact that matters , our health .
Basically one of the things i realized when i was overwhelmed by nutrition is that there is no need for science , studies , ... , only common sense , eat what your ancestors did , the real ones - many generations away , no grandma that might be into junk food too .
There are millions of smokers around that look healthy , that doesn't prove anything .
I don't even try to find or debate if a civilisation who maybe wouldn't have eaten meat , because that is not the point , the point is that at least the majority ( although i believe all ) evolved into eating meat too .
Beside there are many nutrients only found in reasonable amounts and absorbable states , in meat . And this is what we know now . It is like breast milk or in fact all the real foods , we only know part of the substances they contain , there is no substitute made for them because we don't know yet all the conmponents and their role . We could just eat what we ate for hundreds of thousands of years and end the debate here .
Veganism is clearly bringing a lot of defficiencies : b12 , d3 , omega 3 in the states we need most DHA and EPA , vitamin A as vitamin A not betacarotene , minerals in the absorbable forms . heme iron , ..., just too many
And also people didn't always need to hunt , we were scavengers too , We were opportunists .
Beside the animal products are just ready for absorbtion . It doesn't really matters how much we ingest but how much we absorb . If i ate a piece of iron i wouldn't absorb much fom it . Or a piece of calcium containing mineral deposit , it will just pass through the system .
Plants are ok , some of them , and they complete a healthy diet , but care should be made in quantities and preparation . I don't eat grains at all , except maybe for rice from time to time ( a pseudo-grain ) .
There are just so many chemicals in most of the plants people eat , and they also don't prepare them properly .
Think it this way , a plant is an organism , who wants to live and reproduce . It does not to be eaten . The parts that are ok to eat are the parts the plant designed them so : usually the fruits , these can be eaten although many have different risks : tomatoes are technically fruits and they are part of the nightshades so some people need to be careful with them , ...
Other parts are ok to eat but prepared thoroughly , or else the nutrients won't be absorbed and , even worse they will damage a lot : grains and legumes need to be soaked or even sprouted especially for the phytic acid to be neutralized, yet for that they need to be raw to begin with ( almonds are pasteurised in the us and they don't respond to soaking sprouting as much , rolled oats have the phytase destroyed and also the soaking doesn't do much) .
Others have a lot of oxalates , others have purines , most of them have lectins ( and the vegetable form of lectins are worse than the animal ones - they can even destroy the insects digestive tract if they try to eat them ) , and so on .
Soy is hopeless , except for the natto , which is fermented enough , soy has just too many , lectins , oxalates , a lot of phytic acid that doesn't neutralize easily , phytoestrogens , ...
The cruciferous are well known as healthy plants yet they have a lot of oxalates and affect the thyroid ( manifest goitrogenic effects ) . They should be cooked well and the water thrown away , not used in the dish .
The ' scientists ' tried to make people eat whole grains for the fiber and extra minerals , the truth is that those fibers are damaging our guts and the minerals are just locked by the other substances in the bran .
Many plants we eat are growing in depleted soils , also many species are GMO , and virtually all are sprayed ( even the bio industry / standards allow some pesticides )
Vegetable fats - PUFA specifically are really unhealthy - so except for the coconut and red palm oil , they sohuld be avoided .
Animals proteins are complete proteins , only a few plants have complete proteins and even there the aminoacid proportions varies .
Think it this way - animals are similar , it is easier to use something similar in a construction or renovation than to get a totally different material and convert it .
There is just too much , but if you wish you can have a look on the WAPF site or thehealthyhomeeconomist.com , they have great articles .
The thing is that both vegetarian and vegan diet are doctrines , are antropic concepts , and we don't really need to think our nutrition . I mean people have this stupid pride that we are superior to other animals yet the people also don't know yet what to eat - a thing all the animals just do .
Anyway , it's just a part of my point , i am working now and can't focus much .
Well this can be discussed without getting too personal... or angry...
Quote
Beside there are many nutrients only found in reasonable amounts and absorbable states , in meat . And this is what we know now . It is like breast milk or in fact all the real foods , we only know part of the substances they contain , there is no substitute made for them because we don't know yet all the conmponents and their role .
There are quite a few facts not yet understood.
For example there were studies concerning where hens get the materials for their eggs from since materials taken in and put into eggs didn't add up.
It was found out that they were able to synthesize some from other products they take in.
The body is capapble to more than many people believe.
Quote
Basically one of the things i realized when i was overwhelmed by nutrition is that there is no need for science , studies , ... , only common sense , eat what your ancestors did , the real ones - many generations away , no grandma that might be into junk food too .
Well I'd agree but I'd see it a bit diverse:
-eating what the body likes. Its often the body shows by a kind of craving what is missing. (And I don't menan chocolate :) This is like an addiction, not a normal need).
This can be of course directed, like using plant sources if desired...
-there were different styles of nutrition for different people. For scholars etc a different diet for example.
Well an animal usually feeds of plants. So 10 times the amount of weight has to be fed in plants for each kg.
There is also a multiple in substances taken in, it adds up. This is one reason why liver from animals should be eaten sparesly because of added substances there.
Feeding from plants could be less harmful therefore, because there is no multiple.
Well I'd see it similar that non vegetarian foods might be more easily built into the body. But if the goal is to lose muscle this might not be helpful.
Another point is that with non vegetarian sources there are a few substances which might have a reaction on the body.
Stress hormones included there produced during the last hours of the animal might have an influence with intake.
I personally would go with the food craving, pick more plant sources and look for ethical and sound souces all in all.
Additionally often it can be intuitively told if something holds a lot of energy or if it doesn't.
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 07, 2015, 06:00:06 AM
Thank you :)
I am 5' 11" , a little large framed , with thick bones . I would gain weight - and love it , i mean i loooove to eat - but i am scared not to ' fill ' up the muscles too . My hope was that the transition fairy would come and make me skinny and then i would round up from scratch .
Hey girl, I am totally there with you. I started out as a muscular woman, as I was a competitive male gymnast, and I have lost about forty pounds from the start of muscle. Unfortunately, a lot of that has to do with the atrophy of the muscles as you know, which in turn has caused my to gain some unwanted fat, as I too LOVE to eat. I am just now starting to get it under control, as I really don't like the feeling of fat in any way shape or form. I just want to be tight and right. The walks are good, and keeping the low protein helps as well. Sometimes, and I think what happen with me even though i dont suggest it is that I was had a lot of days of depression where I was inside alone in my apartment where I would just stay in bed. It was kinda like being sick, so as i wasnt using those muscles they lost the male bulkiness. Good luck and keep it up, I cant tell much bulk from the photo, but i understand what you mean about not wanting that athletes look as a woman. It is just not for some of us.
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 08, 2015, 04:42:28 AM
And my opinion is that vegetarian / vegan is unhealthy so i am not going there anytime soon .
Not necessarily a solid case for vegetarianism, but research has shown for quite a while now that caloric restrictions extend life. More related to vegetarianism perhaps, is a later study that shows how life expectancy enjoyed by those restricting calorie intake can be replicated by way of a high-carb/low-protein diet. There is of course some associated debate regarding the type and quality of carbs and proteins that we should be consuming, the ratio of carbs to protein and whether it's better to have fasting days -- and the ratio of fast vs meal days -- or to have a more consistent calorie restriction diet.
Quote from: Laura_7 on August 08, 2015, 07:23:15 AM
Well this can be discussed without getting too personal... or angry...
There are quite a few facts not yet understood.
For example there were studies concerning where hens get the materials for their eggs from since materials taken in and put into eggs didn't add up.
It was found out that they were able to synthesize some from other products they take in.
The body is capapble to more than many people believe.
Well I'd agree but I'd see it a bit diverse:
-eating what the body likes. Its often the body shows by a kind of craving what is missing. (And I don't menan chocolate :) This is like an addiction, not a normal need).
This can be of course directed, like using plant sources if desired...
-there were different styles of nutrition for different people. For scholars etc a different diet for example.
Well an animal usually feeds of plants. So 10 times the amount of weight has to be fed in plants for each kg.
There is also a multiple in substances taken in, it adds up. This is one reason why liver from animals should be eaten sparesly because of added substances there.
Feeding from plants could be less harmful therefore, because there is no multiple.
Well I'd see it similar that non vegetarian foods might be more easily built into the body. But if the goal is to lose muscle this might not be helpful.
Another point is that with non vegetarian sources there are a few substances which might have a reaction on the body.
Stress hormones included there produced during the last hours of the animal might have an influence with intake.
I personally would go with the food craving, pick more plant sources and look for ethical and sound souces all in all.
Additionally often it can be intuitively told if something holds a lot of energy or if it doesn't.
As o matter of fact they are : if you want more omega 3 they feed the chicken with omega 3 containing seeds ( flax , walnuts) although naturally they would eat insects for this task , if you want the eggs to have more selenium they supplement with selenium , if you want the bright orange yolk they feed them more beta-carotene ....
About cravings , even more of my point : i crave meat everyday, so i guess there is an extra reason to eat it .
Plants have way more substances that affect us than the animal meats have , put it this way , animals are similar to us , it's a regeneration circle , we eat to replace what is catabolized and also to create hormones , neurotransmitters and so on - what is better , something really similar to us or a seed that only wish to germinate and use all the methods for the animals not to eat it or if eaten to be evacuated in the animal's 'poop ' . Have you heard of so many plants which have the fruits eaten by animals and then their seeds are spread as the animals digestion eliminate them ? Well , grains and legumes ( beans , peanuts , ...) are seeds , they are not easily digestible . Nor are the leafy greens , their nutrients are highly bond inside .
Kids don't need a different nutrition , the principles are the same , only the quantities vary . The fact that the ' modern ' society use to do it differently doesn't mean it is ok . Normal is not ok . The fact that one in two children have a chronical illness like overweight , ADHD , ... , may be normal this days but it is not ok .
Liver is liver , from a grass fed animal or , in general , from an animal that was not farmed , it is on the top foods ever possible . The toxins are not staying there in a healthy animals . Nor in other organs . Think that many antic civilisations used to eat only the organ meats and throw the muscle meat to the dogs . You can check Chris Kresser's site for this .
Also people nowadays are blaming foods in a wrong way : blame dairy , blame meat , but not these are the problem , the problem is how these were produced . If you grow a salad in a polluted soil with polluted water and fertilizer it wil be toxic also .
Calories in foods are not as easy to see .
Take a milkshake from many fastfoods , some go up to 1200 kcals in a single serve .
Or take peanuts , avocados , .. . I used to eat like 300 grams of peanuts (made butter) in 5 minutes , and then i would complain to my girl friends : ' i just ate 2000 kcals ' , and they really made it clear they had no clue that the peanuts are so caloric dense .
Also it is all about the metabolism and the body's point of balance . This week i ate 26000 kcals already in less than 7 days ( dieting .. i know) , and i didn't gained anything visible despite i eat a lot since many months now . Nor do i lose if i diet like i did last year .
I know the goal is to lose muscle but there is no point in adopting an unhealthy lifestyle . It's like people smoking to lose fat . I could just as well maintain the omnivorous style and diet really intense for a month , not eating anything , then restart eating normally , and repeat this in a few months so that the metabolism doesn't slows too much .
Also , as a side note , it is said that stress hormones destroys muscle , well , not for me , i used to cry every single day , from waking up till sleeping , and only slept for 2 hours a night and so one , the muscles are still here .
Quote from: Serverlan on August 08, 2015, 11:33:17 PM
Not necessarily a solid case for vegetarianism, but research has shown for quite a while now that caloric restrictions extend life. More related to vegetarianism perhaps, is a later study that shows how life expectancy enjoyed by those restricting calorie intake can be replicated by way of a high-carb/low-protein diet. There is of course some associated debate regarding the type and quality of carbs and proteins that we should be consuming, the ratio of carbs to protein and whether it's better to have fasting days -- and the ratio of fast vs meal days -- or to have a more consistent calorie restriction diet.
Again , i really don't trust ' studies ' , i trust common sense , i trust the p[rinciple of just eat what we ate since ever . Studies are biased in sooooooo many ways , there are studies even about that , the ' bias of the studies ' , whereas the persons who support the study or the doctrines of the people who make the study affects in a decisive way the conclusion .
There are people , the inuits , who lived there for ages and didn't have fruits or legumes , they ate fish , seals , ... and they have one of the healthiest populations overall .
Yet maybe a complete carnivorous diet would not be good for me either , my ancestors ate some fruits and little vegetables too . Just follow your instincts and common sense . Free your mind of what you learned and from the doctrines . There is no ethic here . Even the vegans would kill cockroaches in their homes or internal parasites if they know they have it . It's about survival and situations , we need to at we eat .
The problem with the humans is that we think and then we think we are superior because we thought . Many things are just meant to be done , to be live . There is the peace and the equilibrum . Lets just respect the ' animals ' by watching them , learning from them , seeing that we are the same even that they don' t use IPhones .
So called scientists have it wrong all the time : cholesterol is bad , saturated fats are bad , breastfeeding is bad , smoking is good , use Mercury to treat sexual diseases , use heroin as a treatment , eat soy , eat trans fats , eat pufa , eat grains , and so on . I don't have the means to post the posters scientists use to have as medical advices , just soo wrong . Now the medical comunity accepted they were wrong in most of the cases , yet no head has fallen , maybe they should be a little more scared prior to do such assumptions and even impose them . Think of the children vaccinated although the vaccines do more harm thatgood , think forced cessareans , forced ombilical cord clamping , all the things they do .
I am not an activist nor a conspiration theory's enthusiast , but Big Pharma exists , Big Food exists , we all are just some lab animals here . I mean come on , a conventional cancer treatment costs like 800 000 to 1 million dollars , of course they want people sick and also just ' treated ' not healed or prevented . Of course they block alternative medicine as they call it , natural homeopath treatments that cost peanuts and have no patent for them to make money of . Taking children away from the parents because they refuse the chemotherapy route is not ok , and it is all based on the ' studies ' .
Perhaps I should have mentioned that I'm vegetarian because I have dietary issues and intolerances with eating a 'normal' omnivorous diet. In my particular case there was a definite improvement in wellness and well being after becoming a vegetarian which made a big difference to my quality of life. As always your experience may vary.
Quote from: Lady Smith on August 09, 2015, 03:05:17 AM
Perhaps I should have mentioned that I'm vegetarian because I have dietary issues and intolerances with eating a 'normal' omnivorous diet. In my particular case there was a definite improvement in wellness and well being after becoming a vegetarian which made a big difference to my quality of life. As always your experience may vary.
Indeed and also , as i said , i really don't try to change anyone . I am not an activist , i don't intend to live for long and i only want to enjoy the little life that remained . I don't have family or friends , i don't really care for nothing , so there is no cause for me , only my opinions .
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 09, 2015, 12:41:33 AM
Cholesterol is bad, saturated fats are bad
Some cholesterol is bad (LDL), some good (HDL). There's still some disagreement about saturated fats, with researchers advising that people err on the side of caution regarding their consumption.
QuoteBreastfeeding is bad
Outside of special circumstances, I've never heard a peer-reviewed medical scientist make this claim. If you know of any, I'd be genuinely interested in reading them.
QuoteSmoking is good
Prior to 1964 nobody had any data to suggest smoking was either good or bad for your health. After that, science stepped in and said "Don't smoke!" (I know, it's Yul Brynner's line, but it sums up the Surgeon General's message so well).
QuoteMercury to treat sexual diseases
First used around 1495 and it killed people as a result. Funnily enough, doctors subsequently advised against its use.
QuoteHeroin as a treatment
Not sure what you mean here, as it's still used today under the name Diamorphine.
QuoteEat trans fats
Again, not sure who has ever advised that it's good to eat foods containing trans fatty acids. They have been used in food, yes, but that has nothing to do with scientific research advocating that food companies should do so. In fact, as early as 1956, scientific literature suggested that trans fatty acids could be linked to coronary artery disease.
QuoteForced caesarean
This is not about science
per se, but rather about the rights of a patient versus the authority of the medical profession and judiciary. I don't think anyone disputes the fact that there is a significant health risk for women who want to give birth naturally after giving multiple caesarean births.
You see, it's not science that tells us what to eat; people who interpret and apply science do that (yes, "big pharma" and "big food", if you want to call it that). Science just shows us what is more or less likely to occur through a process of systematic, repeatable observation and experimentation. Science isn't telling you what to put on your cereal, people who are not scientists are telling you that. People who own huge corporations, the media, or your friend down the road who stopped drinking soy milk because it gave them a rash which may or may not have been linked to the soy milk, but hey, it seems that's what was causing it, even though it takes health specialists months or even years to pin down the single variable responsible for a particular allergy ... *breathes*...
So, in regards to science versus anecdotal evidence, I tend to err on the side of caution and maintain a healthy scepticism about both – though science is infinitely more convincing. You know, peer-reviewed science, not sourced from sensationalist media publications, conspiracy theorist nuts, or ideologically motivated individuals. And yes, I get that some peer-reviewed research is completely wrong. But the fact that it's peer-reviewed, read by other experts, means that this incorrect data can be corrected.
As for your views on child vaccination and homeopathy, I'll take it you included them as some kind of joke.
Quote from: Serverlan on August 09, 2015, 04:56:09 AM
Some cholesterol is bad (LDL), some good (HDL). There's still some disagreement about saturated fats, with researchers advising that people err on the side of caution regarding their consumption.
Outside of special circumstances, I've never heard a peer-reviewed medical scientist make this claim. If you know of any, I'd be genuinely interested in reading them.
Prior to 1964 nobody had any data to suggest smoking was either good or bad for your health. After that, science stepped in and said "Don't smoke!" (I know, it's Yul Brynner's line, but it sums up the Surgeon General's message so well).
First used around 1495 and it killed people as a result. Funnily enough, doctors subsequently advised against its use.
Not sure what you mean here, as it's still used today under the name Diamorphine.
Again, not sure who has ever advised that it's good to eat foods containing trans fatty acids. They have been used in food, yes, but that has nothing to do with scientific research advocating that food companies should do so. In fact, as early as 1956, scientific literature suggested that trans fatty acids could be linked to coronary artery disease.
This is not about science per se, but rather about the rights of a patient versus the authority of the medical profession and judiciary. I don't think anyone disputes the fact that there is a significant health risk for women who want to give birth naturally after giving multiple caesarean births.
You see, it's not science that tells us what to eat; people who interpret and apply science do that (yes, "big pharma" and "big food", if you want to call it that). Science just shows us what is more or less likely to occur through a process of systematic, repeatable observation and experimentation. Science isn't telling you what to put on your cereal, people who are not scientists are telling you that. People who own huge corporations, the media, or your friend down the road who stopped drinking soy milk because it gave them a rash which may or may not have been linked to the soy milk, but hey, it seems that's what was causing it, even though it takes health specialists months or even years to pin down the single variable responsible for a particular allergy ... *breathes*...
So, in regards to science versus anecdotal evidence, I tend to err on the side of caution and maintain a healthy scepticism about both – though science is infinitely more convincing. You know, peer-reviewed science, not sourced from sensationalist media publications, conspiracy theorist nuts, or ideologically motivated individuals. And yes, I get that some peer-reviewed research is completely wrong. But the fact that it's peer-reviewed, read by other experts, means that this incorrect data can be corrected.
As for your views on child vaccination and homeopathy, I'll take it you included them as some kind of joke.
The cholesterol in ourn body was named good or bad , but eating things high in cholesterol and also finding high levels are not related with disease .
Saturated fats were blamed publicily . Think of all the people who get scared when they hear a person is eating butter , who made them think so ?
Now i am, at work and can't find the time to post all the pics and sources , but in will some day .
Doctors used to recommend smoking , also i will post the datas . Beside even the cyclits used to smoke thinking it helps with vascular dilation and more stamina :/
It is not about the risks of birth , it's about women being put under and woke up with the child being brought by caesarian . That without asking for consent first .
It is not about science as an independent thing , it is about the medical community and other people with influence imposing the things found through science .
And yes , vaccines are a just harming children and should be used only in some cases where they really worth the damage they do .
But again , i am not doing activism , i don't even care , i didn't have mine done since i could chose , i wouldn't vaccinate my children and that's that .
People are easier to fool than to agree that they were fooled . They heard vaccines save lives , they believed it , now it will take ages to show that the things are not black nor white , it's a delicate situation that should be approached with an open mind and in a special way for every special case .
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 09, 2015, 05:11:12 AM
It is not about science... it is about the medical community and other people with influence imposing the things found through science.
Yes, that's what I was arguing. On the other hand, you were arguing that "scientists have it wrong" and you "don't trust studies". But if "other people" (the media, politicians, lobby groups, etc.) choose to incorrectly interpret and exploit peer-reviewed scientific studies, it does not mean we should abandon the scientific method altogether.
Quote from: Serverlan on August 08, 2015, 11:33:17 PM
Not necessarily a solid case for vegetarianism, but research has shown for quite a while now that caloric restrictions extend life. More related to vegetarianism perhaps, is a later study that shows how life expectancy enjoyed by those restricting calorie intake can be replicated by way of a high-carb/low-protein diet. There is of course some associated debate regarding the type and quality of carbs and proteins that we should be consuming, the ratio of carbs to protein and whether it's better to have fasting days -- and the ratio of fast vs meal days -- or to have a more consistent calorie restriction diet.
You could look up intermediate fasting.
There is one way for example where you only eat in the evening. Or simply at one time a day.
Quote from: Serverlan on August 09, 2015, 05:28:25 AM
Yes, that's what I was arguing. On the other hand, you were arguing that "scientists have it wrong" and you "don't trust studies". But if "other people" (the media, politicians, lobby groups, etc.) choose to incorrectly interpret and exploit peer-reviewed scientific studies, it does not mean we should abandon the scientific method altogether.
They are not really needed either . It's like reinventing the wheel . Nutrition is nutrition , just eat and live .
Quote from: Laura_7 on August 09, 2015, 05:29:09 AM
You could look up intermediate fasting.
There is one way for example where you only eat in the evening. Or simply at one time a day.
How about the ghrelin levels ? When one fast the whole day the ghrelin raises and the calories will be deposited into fat reserves with a low metabolic rate . The body doesn't know that we are doing it on purpose . It only triggers the famine response .
This is a thing sumo practicants used or still use
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 09, 2015, 05:32:07 AM
They are not really needed either . It's like reinventing the wheel . Nutrition is nutrition , just eat and live .
I don't think either of us knows what the other is talking about.
Over and out.
Quote from: Serverlan on August 09, 2015, 05:37:04 AM
I don't think either of us knows what the other is talking about.
Over and out.
Done :P
Quote from: Claudia_FF on August 09, 2015, 03:12:28 AM
Indeed and also , as i said , i really don't try to change anyone . I am not an activist , i don't intend to live for long and i only want to enjoy the little life that remained . I don't have family or friends , i don't really care for nothing , so there is no cause for me , only my opinions .
Yet you have one secret admirer (well, not so secret now I guess) princess! <3
(Sorry for the offtopic)
Quote from: Serverlan on August 09, 2015, 04:56:09 AM
So, in regards to science versus anecdotal evidence, I tend to err on the side of caution and maintain a healthy scepticism about both – though science is infinitely more convincing. You know, peer-reviewed science, not sourced from sensationalist media publications, conspiracy theorist nuts, or ideologically motivated individuals. And yes, I get that some peer-reviewed research is completely wrong. But the fact that it's peer-reviewed, read by other experts, means that this incorrect data can be corrected. .
Ok, going ontopic again. There's still little to no consense about some things like HDL and LDL cholesterol. Also, as said, you can forget how biased are studies and how influenced are specially by comercial interests.
Science did many errors although corrected most, you don't know how many of the today's great ideas would be tomorrow considered mistakes when more evidence and more extended studies could be completed (or when they simply lose comercial interest). So, there's certain point.
There are nowadays several concerning issues (very concerning imho), like the high prevalence of overweight among the general population (specially concerning in kids), for example. As said, "normal" (at least nowadays normal) is not ok anymore.
Well I sense quite a lot of emotion...
I'd agree its an emotional subject but if seen with a bit less emotion a few things might get clearer.
Well its not like a few hundred years ago. Hopefully it will be again, at least in places where people wake up and realize there are different methods of feeding animals and raising crops. There are already quite a few people who do, and people who are willing to go there.
Farmers markets and direct sales from farms are an example, where it can be asked how it was raised or how animals are fed. Often its with self raised crops and not much additives.
Well concerning animals they feed from plants, have to eat ten times in plants what they grow as weight so there has to be a multiple in substances intaken. If you eat the plants directly you have less substances that affect you. And not all substances can be flushed out. There are nowadays substances which stick to the liver and other organs.
There are for example detox procedures which can be looked up, if people are interested. And there are quite a few plants that detox, like wild garlic.
Well from your answers I'd suggest a few different points of view...
there are plants which have mechanisms to fend off bugs etc. Like nutrition ingredients, or oozing special liquids if attacked.
But a) this may work differently for humans b)there is a huge knowledge that was always present concerning plant healing, which plants are useful, when they best should be harvested etc. People and plants always used to live together. If people are intuitive, like people used in old times, they can sense for example if an apple has a lot of energies or if its only waxed and looking good. It can be trained a bit, and used for shopping.
Or for self growing plants.
I have read quite a few points of view saying that some plants and people live in symbiosis... the plants being spread around the world and grown this way, being useful.
So there might be a point of view reached where it can be seen that it can be a give and take for both. As said, people used to live like that for ages.
What I would agree with is that there are people trying to trick into unhealthy behaviour. But with intuition this can be seen through, and in my opinion this is the last years more and more the case. People are sick of false tactics and are willing to look for decent products.
Well concerning food cravings...
its possible to direct some a bit more towards plants, so the cravings concerning meat might go back a bit.
As said, its similar to what the body is made of, and hormones there have an influence.
In old times the animals were always calmed down and were kind of asked for consent. There were not much fear hormones produced, which might have an influence.
And ecologically, well its a factor of ten times their weight with plant intake, and some say including energy its a factor of twenty compared with direct plant intake.
So its quite a number.
Well there is no need to become vegan from the start... but directing a bit towards more vegetarian nutrition could have good causes.
One of my friends had similar situation and she went for a transgender cosmetic surgery (http://www.ftmtopsurgery.ca/ftm-procedures/) from McLean Clinic in Mississauga. I think it was not bad for her but she was very conscious about herself so she underwent this surgery. Keep continue doing your regular exercises.
Each of us has a vision of their desired body shape. I'm often told I shouldnt be so obsessed with it tho. Its a coin toss on the muscle side, I have always been super fit and a former pro surfer but small boned and 5ft 7ins and now 133 lbs (formerly 148 lbs) and I have decided that that I will be a very fit female. I did want to lose the big lats that I had so I stopped surfing and swimming as a daily exercise and switched to Yoga and the gym where I focus on the X trainer equipment, those muscles have melted away and also my pecs . Our metabolism slows down as a female and we easily put on weight so I have been very careful on my diet, a vegetarian 2 days a week and I don't eat red meat. So after almost 2.5 years on HRT my muscles overall have changed in shape and size. I remember reading about a TG pro female wrestler and about some top male golfers who transitioned and there is definitly a maintenence of muscle above that of a normal cis female but not that of a cis male, so we end in in the twilight region, unless we make a huge effort in diet and exercise reduction. I wanted to aim for a healthy fit and lean body and continue to seek this with goal.